THeBlueCashew

The contradictions begin in Genesis and continue through when Jesus was born, and what happened after he died.

Several letters attributed to Paul in the New Testament are pure forgeries. Paul did not write them.

Jesus of Nazareth may have lived. But, the virgin birth and him remaining single and childless are fake as fuck.

The bible at best is allegorical. It contains a lot of myth and a sprinkling of historical fact. It was curated by the Roman Empire in the fourth century to consolidate their power.

The idea of the Bible being inerrant and infallible is less than 200 years old and of course American. 

Quote from: Shen Li on August 20, 2025, 10:53:10 PMThe contradictions begin in Genesis and continue through when Jesus was born, and what happened after he died.

Several letters attributed to Paul in the New Testament are pure forgeries. Paul did not write them.

Jesus of Nazareth may have lived. But, the virgin birth and him remaining single and childless are fake as fuck.

The bible at best is allegorical. It contains a lot of myth and a sprinkling of historical fact. It was curated by the Roman Empire in the fourth century to consolidate their power.

The idea of the Bible being inerrant and infallible is less than 200 years old and of course American.

It aint something old Herman gives a lot of thought. If the Bible is bullshit, so what. Islamic texts are guides to genocide.

Quote from: Shen Li on August 20, 2025, 10:53:10 PMThe contradictions begin in Genesis and continue through when Jesus was born, and what happened after he died.

Several letters attributed to Paul in the New Testament are pure forgeries. Paul did not write them.

Jesus of Nazareth may have lived. But, the virgin birth and him remaining single and childless are fake as fuck.

The bible at best is allegorical. It contains a lot of myth and a sprinkling of historical fact. It was curated by the Roman Empire in the fourth century to consolidate their power.

The idea of the Bible being inerrant and infallible is less than 200 years old and of course American.

Actually I think there are different versions of the Bible depending on what year and languages they were written in Shen Li Shen. Latin Greek Hebrew. And the contents in each aren't always the same. The Bible we read today probably isn't the same as the one(s) from 100 AD.

I think caskur caskur or Dove Dove know & can explain it to us.

Jesus likes to spend a lot of time with his bro's, even going as far as to assure them he would make his consort and whore Mary Magdalene into a ladyboy so she could get into hebbin (Thomas 114), had a foot fetish for his bro's (John 13) and (if you believe the Ehternopian bibble) even buggered an impressionable young lad at one point (Mark 14).

Not that there's anything wrong with that, just ask JoHoMo.

Quote from: Shen Li on August 20, 2025, 10:53:10 PMThe contradictions begin in Genesis and continue through when Jesus was born, and what happened after he died.

Several letters attributed to Paul in the New Testament are pure forgeries. Paul did not write them.

Jesus of Nazareth may have lived. But, the virgin birth and him remaining single and childless are fake as fuck.

The bible at best is allegorical. It contains a lot of myth and a sprinkling of historical fact. It was curated by the Roman Empire in the fourth century to consolidate their power.

The idea of the Bible being inerrant and infallible is less than 200 years old and of course American.

We used to have a lot of these discussions at one time. I don't care about anyone's religion. As long as they do not try to force it on secular society.

Romans 16:17-18
Now I urge you, brethren, keep your eye on those who cause dissensions and hindrances contrary to the teaching which you learned, and turn away from them. For such men are slaves, not of our Lord Christ but of their own appetites; and by their smooth and flattering speech they deceive the hearts of the unsuspecting

Quote from: Shen Li on August 20, 2025, 10:53:10 PMThe contradictions begin in Genesis and continue through when Jesus was born, and what happened after he died.

Several letters attributed to Paul in the New Testament are pure forgeries. Paul did not write them.

Jesus of Nazareth may have lived. But, the virgin birth and him remaining single and childless are fake as fuck.

The bible at best is allegorical. It contains a lot of myth and a sprinkling of historical fact. It was curated by the Roman Empire in the fourth century to consolidate their power.

The idea of the Bible being inerrant and infallible is less than 200 years old and of course American.

Don't read it and your problem is solved.

Jo Jo and I object to the Apostle Paul's homophobia.

QuoteActually I think there are different versions of the Bible depending on what year and languages they were written in

I said the current bible was curated by the Roman Empire in the 4th century.

Quote from: Shen Li on August 21, 2025, 03:20:42 PMI said the current bible was curated by the Roman Empire in the 4th century.

You see why folks have the old wanker on ignore.

Quote from: Shen Li on August 21, 2025, 03:20:42 PMI said the current bible was curated by the Roman Empire in the 4th century.

In some religions it is still being manipulated. Jehovah Witnesses are a good example of this, their changes to the bible's texts in the form of the New World Translation bible are often subtle but in many cases they screw with the context entirely. And if you should disagree with the elders take on it, you are declared an apostate and your excommunication is all but assured. And not just from the church mind you, family members are encouraged to turn their backs on you too lest they too be excommunicated. You're not even afforded the luxury of examining other religious groups doctrines; as a JayDub you can leave all the books and pamphlettes you like at the places you visit, but you are expected to refuse any and all attempts of others to hand you theirs.

It's been said that if your faith is solid and incontrovertible then it ought to stand up to any and all challenges. One might reasonably assume this would include the writings of alternate religions, so it would be safe to conclude that the forbidding of certain texts to the congregation points to a serious doubt in somebody's mind that their teachings are beyond reproach.

This is part and parcel of why I consider myself agnostic. Every religion will assure you that they have the skinny on the nature and form of the deity(s), something even the atheists are guilty of in claiming the total absence of same. So many competing stories, all of which require you to take them on faith. Someone has to be wrong here.

Having said this however, I put it to you that dismissing any religious text as "horseshit" is a mistake. Leaving aside any declaration on the nature of some groovy sky fairy, these books have been used to formulate the society you operate within, the rules and expectations on acceptable behaviour all flow from it. This has tangible and appreciable value in provisioning of an agreed social contract for a group of people to operate under.

You are free to disagree of course. I would note however that if the bible (any of them) were truly horseshit as you say and furthermore dismissed as such, then things like "thou shalt not steal" would be included in the "horsehit" pile and any and all complaint you might levy against Ottawa's penchant for stealing the fruits of your labour be null and void.

And you're not about to do that.  :biggrin:

Never mind the modern translations of the bible as you mentioned about the NW version. I am talking about the translation from the original Greek manuscripts to other languages. I am talking about letters attributed to Paul in the new testament that were forgeries. I am talking about the Romans deliberately omitting some non-canonical books from the final Bible because it didn't serve the empire's grip on power.

All of that is on top of the contradictions within the Roman Bible that they themselves curated in the 4th century.

Inerrant and infallible my yellow ass. That is a modern North American understanding of Xtianity that was a backlash against what was happening in Europe at the time. In particular, Germany.

Quote from: Shen Li on August 23, 2025, 03:37:54 PMNever mind the modern translations of the bible as you mentioned about the NW version. I am talking about the translation from the original Greek manuscripts to other languages.

And I'm telling you there is more than one "current version". I'll even go you one better, the original texts were in a hodgepodge of languages, Greek being only one of many. It isn't as though we can point to any one parent translation of works and claim them to be singularly representative of "the bible" in its entirety with all others being complete bunkum, not when there are so many divergent and actively competing editions of it. Not unless you plan on practicing the kinds of slavering elitism you and I give the average liberal for indulging in, though I would hasten to remind you that it isn't as if Liberals enjoy a monopoly on such behaviour.

The Romans of the fourth century (which your timely clarification of your original intent appears necessary, given that your intent wasn't immediately obvious to me) certainly practiced such elitism, but no matter; in my previous reply I indicated to you that a faithfulness and historically accuracy aside, the bible's worth can be judged in the success of the societies that arose from its teachings. We can both agree that the "Damasine List" of authoritative teachings does indeed form to which you refer and repudiate a relatively small part of the whole and was selected by the Council of Rome to apply to "The Christian Church" of the day with the intent on governing a sizeable what of the population at the time. It did enjoy some limited success in guiding its adherents on societally acceptable expressions and interactions, its contents, along with the societies it was initially designed to rule over, have long since flourished and perished through its many subsequent rewrites and "remasterings". Ancient Rome no longer exists, its people no longer exist, but for the time they did, they made a fist of it under the rubric of what you call "horseshit" today. They weren't the only ones mind you, nor were they the first to turn these tales into a working civilization.

There is the "worth" and in my mind there isn't a single person here that can disprove it, myself included.




I deliberately cast my net wide when it comes to biblical teachings because I seek to eschew such elitism and there are few of any flavour of the cloth that it doesn't invite claims of heresy and apostacy from. Being an avowed agnostic I am free to challenge their beliefs and enrich my own understanding of it all and make it work a little better for me. Simply pointing at it and calling it a pile of meadow muffins doesn't really advance the action any in my estimation, not when it was already long cold when it was sifted for corn and served up by Mario and Luigi a millennia and a half ago. Big fucken whoopie that it's a Readers Digest version of the original, it was proven to work and wasn't being shoveled by a bunch of gender dysphoric pooftersexuals that were openly advocating for the statutory rape of minors... or worse.

I can suspend any disbelief accuracy or lack thereof for as long as it inspires peoples better nature. And I commend similar from you, irrespective of where Ultimate Truth resides.  :smiley:

Certainly some interesting takes on the origins of Christian religion. But, Jo Jo and I are uncomfortable with the Apostle Paul's blatant homophobia.

Are you an atheist, Shen Lee?

Quote from: Renegade Quark on August 24, 2025, 11:39:29 PMatAre you an atheist, Shen Lee?

UR are fucking right I am an atheist.

If you have a problem with that, I will sit on ur face.

Religion is bullshit used to control weak minded people.

Quote from: Oliver the Second on August 25, 2025, 09:54:11 AMReligion is bullshit used to control weak minded people.

George Carlin was the world's funniest atheist.

Quote from: Shen Li on August 24, 2025, 11:46:52 PMUR are fucking right I am an atheist.

If you have a problem with that, I will sit on ur face.

I'm not sure whether that is a threat or promise.  As for the atheist thing is concerned, you do you. I will say that I admire your faith.

Quote from: Renegade Quark on August 26, 2025, 12:07:56 AMI will say that a admire your faith.

I am going to use that line on the next obnoxious atheist I meet. :s_laugh:

Quote from: JOE on August 21, 2025, 01:18:12 AMActually I think there are different versions of the Bible depending on what year and languages they were written in Shen Li Shen. Latin Greek Hebrew. And the contents in each aren't always the same. The Bible we read today probably isn't the same as the one(s) from 100 AD.

I think caskur caskur or Dove Dove know & can explain it to us.

 Its not different versions. Its different translations.

 Its an ancient text written in ancient languages from the perspectives of an ancient culture.

 The only legit contradiction is between two of the gospels. One says Judas hung himself and the other says he impaled himself.

 All the other things people view as contradictions have logic explainations or are more clarified by a deeper study of the text.

 Its a super heavy topic and one i dont usually have the mental or emotionally energy to discuss on forums. I come here to spew. I like mostly mindless and silly...shits and giggles posting.

 That doesnt mean im opposed to a discussion but i tend to lack the drive to get into arguements about it.

 When it comes down to it, if someone is put off or just rejects it, no amount of arguing about it is going to change their minds. Faith is a personal journey for each individual. Sometimes understanding the Bible takes more effort than a person wants to use on it. If they dont WANT to make that effort, no amount of arguing with them will change their minds.

 If anything it puts them off even more and agitates them.

Quote from: Dove on August 26, 2025, 02:27:47 PMIts not different versions. Its different translations.

 Its an ancient text written in ancient languages from the perspectives of an ancient culture.

 The only legit contradiction is between two of the gospels. One says Judas hung himself and the other says he impaled himself.

 All the other things people view as contradictions have logic explainations or are more clarified by a deeper study of the text.

 Its a super heavy topic and one i dont usually have the mental or emotionally energy to discuss on forums. I come here to spew. I like mostly mindless and silly...shits and giggles posting.

 That doesnt mean im opposed to a discussion but i tend to lack the drive to get into arguements about it.

 When it comes down to it, if someone is put off or just rejects it, no amount of arguing about it is going to change their minds. Faith is a personal journey for each individual. Sometimes understanding the Bible takes more effort than a person wants to use on it. If they dont WANT to make that effort, no amount of arguing with them will change their minds.

 If anything it puts them off even more and agitates them.

The very last sentence is so true.

 

Quote from: Thiel on August 26, 2025, 02:38:22 PMThe very last sentence is so true.

 The Bible never fails to elicit strong feelings and opinions and i learned a long time ago that there is aways a deeper more personal reason for all of that.

Quote from: Dove on August 26, 2025, 02:27:47 PMIts not different versions. Its different translations.

 Its an ancient text written in ancient languages from the perspectives of an ancient culture.

 The only legit contradiction is between two of the gospels. One says Judas hung himself and the other says he impaled himself.

 All the other things people view as contradictions have logic explainations or are more clarified by a deeper study of the text.

 Its a super heavy topic and one i dont usually have the mental or emotionally energy to discuss on forums. I come here to spew. I like mostly mindless and silly...shits and giggles posting.

 That doesnt mean im opposed to a discussion but i tend to lack the drive to get into arguements about it.

 When it comes down to it, if someone is put off or just rejects it, no amount of arguing about it is going to change their minds. Faith is a personal journey for each individual. Sometimes understanding the Bible takes more effort than a person wants to use on it. If they dont WANT to make that effort, no amount of arguing with them will change their minds.

 If anything it puts them off even more and agitates them.

First of all I just want to say, I don't care about anybody's religion. That is as long as they don't try to force it on society.

I started this thread because I was feeling feisty. I wanted to argue with white people.

There are literally dozens of contradictions in the bible. Fundamentalist Xtian apologists always try to explain it. They have to since they believe in the relatively new concept of inerrancy.

Right from the beginning in Genesis 1:1-2:3, it unfolds in a structured, ordered sequence over six days, culminating in the creation of humanity (male and female) together on the sixth day.

In Genesis 2:4-25, however, the narrative is more focused on human formation. Here, man (Adam) is created first from the dust of the ground, followed by vegetation, animals, and finally, a woman (Eve) as a helper.

I can give lots of examples, but if you believe in the North American fundamentalist idea of inerrancy/infallibility of the bible you will be forced to find an explanation.

Quote from: Shen Li on August 26, 2025, 05:48:31 PMFirst of all I just want to say, I don't care about anybody's religion. That is as long as they don't try to force it on society.

I started this thread because I was feeling feisty. I wanted to argue with white people.

There are literally dozens of contradictions in the bible. Fundamentalist Xtian apologists always try to explain it. They have to since they believe in the relatively new concept of inerrancy.

Right from the beginning in Genesis 1:1-2:3, it unfolds in a structured, ordered sequence over six days, culminating in the creation of humanity (male and female) together on the sixth day.

In Genesis 2:4-25, however, the narrative is more focused on human formation. Here, man (Adam) is created first from the dust of the ground, followed by vegetation, animals, and finally, a woman (Eve) as a helper.

I can give lots of examples, but if you believe in the North American fundamentalist idea of inerrancy/infallibility of the bible you will be forced to find an explanation.

 What is the contradiction here?

 Im genuinely asking because im not sure where you see a contradiction with this?

 Chapter two in Genesis is a more detailed telling of events from chapter 1....its not like a continuation of the narrative.

 The books of the Bible can be tricky because the ancient Hebrews didnt express events the same way we do, so there is a a lot of jumping around.

 If we were writing it, we would have put chapter 1 and 2 together....where as the Hebrew writer wrote out the first chapter and then in chapter two went back into more depth on the creation of humans.

 Not sure if im typing this out properly. 

Quote from: Dove on August 26, 2025, 07:25:47 PMWhat is the contradiction here?

 Im genuinely asking because im not sure where you see a contradiction with this?

 Chapter two in Genesis is a more detailed telling of events from chapter 1....its not like a continuation of the narrative.

 The books of the Bible can be tricky because the ancient Hebrews didnt express events the same way we do, so there is a a lot of jumping around.

 If we were writing it, we would have put chapter 1 and 2 together....where as the Hebrew writer wrote out the first chapter and then in chapter two went back into more depth on the creation of humans.

 Not sure if im typing this out properly. 

Look kid, the contents of the bible don't mean much to most folks. myself included. But, it does look like they got the order wrong in that example. That would be a contradiction. I think so anyway.

Quote from: Herman on August 26, 2025, 07:56:57 PMLook kid, the contents of the bible don't mean much to most folks. myself included. But, it does look like they got the order wrong in that example. That would be a contradiction. I think so anyway.

 No its not "wrong", its just not the order WE would write it in.

 Its an ancient text, in an ancient language, from an ancient culture. So its not something you can pick up and read just as if its a modern day body of English lit. Its very different.

 This is why people get so confused by all the different translations. You really gotta have a grasp on what you are dealing with when it comes to any ancient text.

 It takes effort to really read and exegete any old literature, even lit written in old English 1000s of years ago. When it comes to the Bible....this was all ancient Hebrew.

 To them it was in perfect order. They even read left to right, and they had no vowels.  I have a Torah (the Old Testament) and its so pretty to look at....but good luck ever read it as a modern English speaker lol. I have relied heavily on lexicons and dictionaries and reading about the times. 

 Im faaaarrr from expert level, but i got what i was looking for out of it and i dont mind conversations about it when asked.

Quote from: Dove on August 26, 2025, 08:13:43 PMNo its not "wrong", its just not the order WE would write it in.

 Its an ancient text, in an ancient language, from an ancient culture. So its not something you can pick up and read just as if its a modern day body of English lit. Its very different.

 This is why people get so confused by all the different translations. You really gotta have a grasp on what you are dealing with when it comes to any ancient text.

 It takes effort to really read and exegete any old literature, even lit written in old English 1000s of years ago. When it comes to the Bible....this was all ancient Hebrew.

 To them it was in perfect order. They even read left to right, and they had no vowels.  I have a Torah (the Old Testament) and its so pretty to look at....but good luck ever read it as a modern English speaker lol. I have relied heavily on lexicons and dictionaries and reading about the times. 

 Im faaaarrr from expert level, but i got what i was looking for out of it and i dont mind conversations about it when asked.

It's also been copied from other earlier written works and from the gospel of Mark which is the oldest of the canonical gospels. And we don't know the authors.

Here is another irreconcilable contradiction. It comes from the Christmas account.

In Luke's gospel, Jesus is born, Mary has to make an offering in the temple, and then they go straight back to Nazareth, which is about 160 kms to the north up in Galilee.

In Matthew's gospel. Jesus is born, and Joseph is warned that Herod is now going to try and kill the child. And so, Joseph takes the family and goes down to Egypt, and they stay there till Herod dies. When they hear that Herod died, they come back. They can't resettle in Bethlehem like they want. They resettle in Nazareth.

If Matthew is right that they went down to Egypt for months or years or however long, how can Luke be right that they immediately return to Nazareth?

I'm not a mythicist. There's a possibility that Jesus of Nazareth existed. But, he was not born of a virgin. The Bible doesn't even state that. That story was stolen from earlier religions. And Jesus would have been married and had a family.

How about a little religious humour.
(https://scontent.fyxd1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t39.30808-6/515439651_1198712418962793_5314067745058702366_n.jpg?stp=dst-jpg_s640x640_tt6&_nc_cat=108&ccb=1-7&_nc_sid=833d8c&_nc_ohc=WqgJy5q5-7UQ7kNvwGTusmM&_nc_oc=Adl6TQzX0OGA9GnbDwsJUq3_GbInwzqU03RUA236YpmrX0eaq3cfwlFg7LQp_2NffOdX5_Z95XkXlJ3RLknbzoZ5&_nc_zt=23&_nc_ht=scontent.fyxd1-1.fna&_nc_gid=vA9oPPnIQM9q_mHEOgOhNA&oh=00_AfX70v4Gcr7fqDNGqiwVAY3mjfzqht3u9dinoc_ZsUvTiA&oe=68B425E8)

Quote from: Dove on August 26, 2025, 03:04:52 PMThe Bible never fails to elicit strong feelings and opinions and i learned a long time ago that there is aways a deeper more personal reason for all of that.

It absolutely has that affect.

If you want to know the Bible I am qualified to teach it, up to a point.

But for months now, this year particularly, every night I become overwhelmed with sadness. I have lost many many people to death. And because I am down hearted and a bit of a misery guts over losing so many, teaching Biblical stuff isn't where I am working well atm.

So I will leave you all with this notion, if you want to get to know God for real, start talking to him in silent prayer. He listens.

Love is the most important thing... agape love. Agape is the Greek word for unconditional love.

 

Quote from: caskur on August 29, 2025, 10:30:14 AMIf you want to know the Bible I am qualified to teach it, up to a point.

But for months now, this year particularly, every night I become overwhelmed with sadness. I have lost many many people to death. And because I am down hearted and a bit of a misery guts over losing so many, teaching Biblical stuff isn't where I am working well atm.

So I will leave you all with this notion, if you want to get to know God for real, start talking to him in silent prayer. He listens.

Love is the most important thing... agape love. Agape is the Greek word for unconditional love.

 

I am sorry for your losses caskur.

Quote from: formosan on August 29, 2025, 10:46:42 AMI am sorry for your losses caskur.

Once you reach your 60s, you start losing older relatives... everyone will go through it... we were talking to one of our old friends 77 who's mum will be turning 104 in December... her mind is still perfect and she has never been on a pension. He has just put her in a home... she just wants to die. She's had enough.

Quote from: caskur on August 29, 2025, 11:18:55 AMOnce you reach your 60s, you start losing older relatives... everyone will go through it... we were talking to one of our old friends 77 who's mum will be turning 104 in December... her mind is still perfect and she has never been on a pension. He has just put her in a home... she just wants to die. She's had enough.

I've never known a centenarian caskur.

Quote from: Shen Li on August 26, 2025, 09:50:09 PMI'm not a mythicist. There's a possibility that Jesus of Nazareth existed. But, he was not born of a virgin. The Bible doesn't even state that. That story was stolen from earlier religions.

Definitions change for a variety of reasons; you saw an example of that recently with the redefining of the words "vaccine". This is not exactly a new concept.

The unearthing of the Dead Sea Scrolls has led scholars to understand that the definition of "virgin" was a lot closer to "barren" than it was to "person who has never had a fuck". Exactly when this particular shift in the nomenclature happened is unclear; it might have been before the Council of Rome determined which gospels to include and exclude, it may have been later. What does seem apparent however is that there was a definite bias towards the texts that deified Jesus at the expense of those that leaned more towards his mortality. Which would honestly make sense to do from a religious standpoint; it's a much taller ask to challenge a supernatural authority than someone who is more or less your equal, no?

Another word that held a definitively different interpretation was "resurrection". An ancient Roman concept, it was the restoration of ones titles and possessions. Around the time this was discovered the scrolls were all shipped off to the Vatican and only those who enjoyed the favour of the church were afforded their study henceforth.

But evidence of a disconnect of understanding yet persists should you read the bible and compare its verses. Perhaps one if the more blatant ones to persist (and even within competing flavours of Christianity itself) would be the actual number of gods. None of us should be arrogant enough to claim a definitive count of "one God" when there are those who regard Jesus as God and others that claim him as the son of God (trinitarian vs non-trinitarian); additionally it seems that God is contradicting himself when in Corinthians and Isiah he is explicitly stating things like "there is no God but Me" while acknowledging the existence of other gods in Deuteronomy and demanding he take precedent over them.

Dove is right to point out that the original texts are many and varied, I would also point out that a good many of these were oral traditions for centuries before being committed to papyrus. To have such a collection, both an incomplete collection of the ancient legends as well as its surviving texts translated and retranslated so long after their initial orators and scribes drew their final breaths... well it doesn't exactly lend itself towards a definitive accounting of historical accuracy. Some choose to argue their interpretation from a position of their own Faith; I'm not one of them any more than I can take it on faith that there is an absence of any God simply because some atheist has picked a myriad of holes in the argument. One God.... Many Gods... No God... ALL of these options require faith in an unproven belief to the average agnostic.

Again though, each competing "sky fairy" has proven unifying in their own way among the people that preach them. There is the value (at least as far as I see it) because its works have included societies that functioned more or less smoothly under its governance.

Without which we would have been little better than your average virus, propagating ourselves without reference to every other viral particle in the vicinity, consuming and subsuming everything to further the individual's dominance over all else. The Bible and other books like it afford us an understanding of the framework we might employ to realise our existence as something more than the sum of our individual parts, if nothing else.